Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
G.D. Builders – Appellant
Versus
KLJ Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of arbitration process. (Para 1 , 8) |
| 2. claim of unpaid dues and contract disputes. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. appointment of arbitrator for dispute resolution. (Para 7 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. limitation period for filing arbitration. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT
1. A petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has been filed for appointment of the Arbitrator.
2. It is submitted in the petition that respondent sister concern M/s Caddilac Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. had invited tender for "Construction of Group Housing "KLJ Heights" at Sector-15, Village Kassar Bahadurgarh, Haryana". The petitioner was declared as successful bidder respondent had issued a letter of intent bearing ref.no. KLJ/CD/BGH/2009-10/01 on 02nd June, 2009 on total contractual amount of Rs.8,44,90,848/-. The work order no. KLJ/CD/BGH/2009-10/02 dated 09th June, 2009 was issued by the respondent to the petitioner which contains the terms and conditions oi this work. As per Clause 7 of the Work Order, the period of completion of work was 35 months from the date of work order. The defect liability period was 12 months from the date of hand
Claims for arbitration may not be barred by limitation where disputes involve mixed questions of fact and law, and both parties may present defenses to the arbitrator.
Arbitration clauses must be honored, and disputes regarding limitation can be addressed by the arbitrator, reinforcing that claims raised by either party do not void the arbitration process.
The court ruled that claims for arbitration were not patently barred by limitation, allowing the petition to proceed despite challenges on this ground.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputed claims between parties in accordance with Section 11(6) of the Arbitration an....
The court affirmed that when parties acknowledge disputes in a contractual agreement, an arbitrator must be appointed to resolve these disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court upheld the validity of the arbitration agreement and recognized the petitioner’s adherence to the procedural requirements for arbitration, irrespective of the respondent's claims regarding ....
Court under Section 11(6) appoints arbitrator upon undisputed invocation of arbitration clause in contract, permitting respondents to raise limitation and merits objections before tribunal.
Arbitration Agreement - Appointment of - The learned Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
The court confirmed the validity of invoking arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when disputes arise over contract performance and payment.
The court applied the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint a sole arbitrator and ensure compliance before commencing the arbitration.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
